Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Accounting ethical dilemmas in the enron scandal
Accounting ethical dilemmas in the enron scandal
Accounting ethical dilemmas in the enron scandal
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Accounting ethical dilemmas in the enron scandal
Lack of Auditor Independence
Background
In response to the famous Enron accounting scandal, which resulted in dissolution of the company and its auditing firm Arthur Anderson, for overstated income by intentionally understating liabilities and concealing debt through special purpose entities, while Arthur Anderson was found guilty for destroying evidence that tied the firm to its audit of Enron, the SEC (2002) designed a rules to ensure that auditors are independent of their audit client and the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002 mandates that audit committees be responsible for the oversight of the engagement of the company’s independent auditor. However, the growing concern of the lack of auditor’s independence still remains. The SEC’s general
…show more content…
Fiolleau et al. mentioned that the regulatory reforms positioned the audit committee as client and held them responsible on auditor appointment process, however the investigation suggest that the management has significant influence or control over the decision making process of selecting an auditor instead, and the role of the audit committee was interpreted as a monitor to auditor selection process and did not take the full responsibility in gathering the information and the selection decision (pp.874-877). Fiolleau et al. study result shows that the RFP was drafted by the CFO with an evaluative criteria indicating the disqualification if the auditors contact the audit committee members except the chair, and appointing the VP-finance as a single point of contact, and sent to the auditor with audit committee approval, which is opposite to the AICPA (2004) recommendation to have the audit committee issue the RFP with the management signature (p.874). Fiolleau et al. study discovered that during deliberations, no meeting without the management presence, while during the evaluation process the management met without the audit committee and then provided their recommendation to the audit committee afterwards, which is not the best practice because the corporate governance recommendation is for the board to deliberate in a video conference settings (p.876). Fiolleau et al. specified that regulatory reforms assigned audit committee as decision maker to appoint external auditor to promote independence of auditors from their clients and dictate audit partner rotation to institute as another set of eyes or fresh look, however
On the surface, the motives behind decisions and events leading to Enron’s downfall appear simple enough: individual and collective greed born in an atmosphere of market euphoria and corporate arrogance. Hardly anyone—the company, its employees, analysts or individual investors—wanted to believe the company was too good to be true. So, for a while, hardly anyone did. Many kept on buying the stock, the corporate mantra and the dream. In the meantime, the company made many high-risk deals, some of which were outside the company’s typical asset risk control process. Many went sour in the early months of 2001 as Enron’s stock price and debt rating imploded because of loss of investor and creditor trust. Methods the company used to disclose its complicated financial dealings were all wrong and downright deceptive. The company’s lack of accuracy in reporting its financial affairs, followed by financial restatements disclosing billions of dollars of omitted liabilities and losses, contributed to its downfall. The whole affair happened under the watchful eye of Arthur Andersen LLP, which kept a whole floor of auditors assigned at Enron year-round.
The audit committee must certify that the company’s auditors are independent. The audit committee must approve all professional services provided to the company by its independent auditors and ensure that auditors do not provide to the company any of the specifically prohibited services identified by SOX, such as bookkeeping services. The audit committee must receive and analyze key items of information from the independent auditors. These items of information include auditors’ analysis of critical accounting policies adopted by the
It has been a decade since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act became in effect. Obviously, the SOX Act which aimed at increasing the confidence in the US capital market really has had a profound influence on public companies and public accounting firms. However, after Enron scandal which triggered the issue of SOX Act, public company lawsuits due to fraud still emerged one after another. As such, the efficacy of the 11-year-old Act has continually been questioned by professionals and public. In addition, the controversy about the cost and benefit of Sarbanes-Oxley Act has never stopped.
Conflict of interest. So this section could be helpful in catching the fraudulent activities, since Enron wouldn’t be able to hire Andersen for audit purposes. More over the audit partner responsible for reviewing the audit must rotate every five years. This will prevent ongoing fraud from occurring for more than a few years.
The SEC and the former Chairman Arthur Levitt Jr. were extremely concerned that the public accounting firms were violating the auditors independence rules addressed through the Securities Exchange Acts. Auditing firms now had dual citizenship in public companies: (1) they issued opinions on audited financial statements and (2) they participated in various consulting engagements for those same companies. Levitt's solution was to split auditing and consulting. The former Chairman was concerned that the public would lose confidence in the financial markets …… and the whole system would be jeopardized.
Throughout the past several years major corporate scandals have rocked the economy and hurt investor confidence. The largest bankruptcies in history have resulted from greedy executives that “cook the books” to gain the numbers they want. These scandals typically involve complex methods for misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of assets or underreporting of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other corporations (Medura 1-3). In response to the increasing number of scandals the US government amended the Sarbanes Oxley act of 2002 to mitigate these problems. Sarbanes Oxley has extensive regulations that hold the CEO and top executives responsible for the numbers they report but problems still occur. To ensure proper accounting standards have been used Sarbanes Oxley also requires that public companies be audited by accounting firms (Livingstone). The problem is that the accounting firms are also public companies that also have to look after their bottom line while still remaining objective with the corporations they audit. When an accounting firm is hired the company that hired them has the power in the relationship. When the company has the power they can bully the firm into doing what they tell them to do. The accounting firm then loses its objectivity and independence making their job ineffective and not accomplishing their goal of honest accounting (Gerard). Their have been 379 convictions of fraud to date, and 3 to 6 new cases opening per month. The problem has clearly not been solved (Ulinski).
Take into consideration the auditors from Arthur Andersen. They did not take into consideration the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The auditors from Arthur Andersen took into consideration the consequences only for their own firm and their own well-being. Vinson & Elkins lawyers should not have destroyed evidence in order to protect their client Enron. Lawyers do take an oath to help protect and defend their client but they are not to help find ways for their client to violate the
According to the article authored by Mark Rupert, what are the seven best practices in the roles and responsibilities of an internal audit function?
Corporate governance changed drastically after the case of Andersen Auditors, Enron’s auditing service showed that they contributed to the scandal. Andersen was originally founded in 1913, and by taking tough stands against clients, quickly gained a national reputation as a reliable keeper of the people’s trust (Beasley, 2003). Andersen provided auditing statements with a ‘clean’ approval stamp from 1997 to 2001, but was found guilty of obstructing justice by shredding evidence relating to the Enron scandal on the 15th June 2002. It agrees to cease auditing public companies by 31 August (BBC News, 2002).
The oversight responsibilities of the board, the CAE lacking of expertise or broad understanding of financial controls and responsibilities, and the understaffed internal audit functions lacking of independence and direct access to the board of directors contributed to the absence of internal controls. To begin with, the board should be retrained to achieve financial literacy to review financial reporting. Other than attending formal meetings, the board of directors should be more involved with the management. For the Audit Committee, the two members who were recruited as acquaintances to Brennahan need be replaced with experts who are more sufficiently knowledgeable about accounting rules beyond merely “financially literate”. Furthermore, the internal audit functions need to expand with different expertise commensurate with the expanded activities of the organization, testing financial reporting rather than internal controls from an operational perspective. The CAE should be more independent and proactive to execute audit plans, instead of following orders from the CFO, and initiate a direct and efficient communication between internal audit and audit
Enron was on the of the most successful and innovative companies throughout the 1990s. In October of 2001, Enron admitted that its income had been vastly overstated; and its equity value was actually a couple of billion dollars less than was stated on its income statement (The Fall of Enron, 2016). Enron was forced to declare bankruptcy on December 2, 2001. The primary reasons behind the scandal at Enron was the negligence of Enron’s auditing group Arthur Andersen who helped the company to continually perpetrate the fraud (The Fall of Enron, 2016). The Enron collapse had a huge effect on present accounting regulations and rules.
The fundamental duty of an external financial auditor is to form and express an opinion on whether the reporting entity’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with the relevant financial reporting framework. In discharging this duty, the auditor must exercise “reasonable skill, care and caution” (Lopes, J. in Kingston Cotton Mill Co 1896) as reflected in current legal and professional requirements.
The evolution of auditing is a complicated history that has always been changing through historical events. Auditing always changed to meet the needs of the business environment of that day. Auditing has been around since the beginning of human civilization, focusing mainly, at first, on finding efraud. As the United States grew, the business world grew, and auditing began to play more important roles. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, people began to invest money into large corporations. The Stock Market crash of 1929 and various scandals made auditors realize that their roles in society were very important. Scandals and stock market crashes made auditors aware of deficiencies in auditing, and the auditing community was always quick to fix those deficiencies. The auditors’ job became more difficult as the accounting principles changed, and became easier with the use of internal controls. These controls introduced the need for testing; not an in-depth detailed audit. Auditing jobs would have to change to meet the changing business world. The invention of computers impacted the auditors’ world by making their job at times easier and at times making their job more difficult. Finally, the auditors’ job of certifying and testing companies’ financial statements is the backbone of the business world.
Audit is a process to evaluate and review the accounts and financial statement objectively. We can divide it into internal auditors and external auditors. Internal auditors have a inner knowledge of business process. Auditor has access to the much confidential information and all levels of management. But they may lose their judgement and they are not acceptable by the shareholder. “The overall objective of the external auditors is to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to report on the financial statements in acco...
The major characters of the tradition audit are all information what is needed by auditors are on the paper and the manual calculators and without high communication technology. Auditors usually were limited by the place in the paper time. When a several people are working on the same auditing project for a client with offices in cities across the country, even worldwide, it takes a lots all time those auditors get the information which they need from the client, even there is risk paper information disappear for many reasons. on the another hand, mail paper information increase the auditing cost. The mistake caused by the manual calculators inevitably, no matter how fixed auditors concentrate on recalculate is, after all auditors are human. The global business become major in the modern business world, some example, several auditors who are in different locations are working a same auditing project, or auditors are in different city even country with the client, when there is issue among these auditors or between auditors and client, they only can communicate with each other by phone or be together and have meeting. Phone call can not make sure information been watched in the same time when the voice is talking about the issue, but having a meeting takes time and money make all people together, it increases auditing cost.